View Single Post
Old 02-22-2011, 04:37 PM   #27
AlaskaAngel
Senior Member
 
AlaskaAngel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,018
Re: To treat or not to treat VERY early stage HER2 IDC

Trastuzumab is better than nothing, but just how much better is hard to know.

A number of those who were like me and were post-chemo and in limbo when trastuzumab was made available to those newly diagnosed, went ahead and did herceptin alone, "late". My onc felt it was unlikely to benefit me but was willing to provide it "late", and I chose not to have it. No one can say for sure whether those who did it "late" got any benefit in terms of actually keeping cancer at bay, whether they believe they did or not.

The costs to the health care system as a whole are particularly substantial for that treatment.

It is a matter of choice, but I don't think it is proof, to be someone who stays NED with "late" trastuzumab.

Choice, with or without chemo or trastuzumab is valuable. It is unfortunate that trastuzumab alone has been discouraged.

AlaskaAngel
__________________
Dx 2002 age 51
bc for granny, aunt, cousin, sister, mother.
ER+/PR+/HER2+++, grade 3
IDC 1.9 cm, some DCIS, Stage 1, Grade 3
Lumpectomy, CAFx6 (no blood boosters), IMRT rads, 1 3/4 yr tamoxifen
Rads necrosis
BRCA 1 & 2 negative
Trials: Early detection OVCA; 2004 low-dose testosterone for bc survivors
Diet: Primarily vegetarian organic; metformin (no diabetes), vitamin D3
Exercise: 7 days a week, 1 hr/day
No trastuzumab, no taxane, no AI
NED
AlaskaAngel is offline   Reply With Quote